Enough is enough with the indirect pay to win DLC.

Let me just start with that when this game game came out I was disappointed like everyone else with the lack of content. I was also disappointed that the season pass was going to be $50. But after I started to play it, it turns out I really liked the multiplayer. I became a big word-of-mouth supporter and encouraged a bunch of friends to grab it so that we could play together. However, there's a troubling trend that's going on in gaming (not just with Battlefront) that we need to put a stop to by letting EA/Dice and other developers know is not cool. Indirect pay to win.

Here's the deal, when you buy an online game, the game should be the same for everyone playing. It would be ridiculous to get the new Madden only to have the Detroit Lions, Patriots, Seahawks, and Browns locked behind a pay wall. But what makes it really unfair is that when you go to play someone who paid and they can use the Patriots and you can't. Now, the game isn't the same for all who purchased it originally. It should be that only people who purchased the Patriots can play against other people who purchased the DLC as well ...or is should be that they can play non-DLC people but they can't use the Patriots.

You might be thinking, that's a sports game. It's not the same. Ok. What about Mortal Kombat X or Super Smash Brothers where characters are locked behind DLC but people who purchased them can use them against you online? Maybe one of the DLC characters has some great counters to your #1 character of choice.

And now we have Battlefront. With weapons and cards that only DLC purchasers can use. Dioxis grenade, Disruption, etc. This is not cool and a trend we as gamers shouldn't allow anymore.

You also might be thinking I'm cheap. "Just buy it!" you might say. I'm not cheap and I'm not against DLC. This is different. The core game/gameplay should be the same for everyone. And even if I was cheap or money was tight, why are you penalizing me for my situation?

When DICE made Bad Company 2 Vietnam, it had new weapons and maps. Bought it. Loved it. But I wasn't allowed to use those weapons like the flame thrower in regular BC2. Why? Because that would be stupid.

You might also be thinking I suck at Battlefont and that's why I'm complaining. You'd be wrong. Positive kill count, positive W/K ratio, and level 61.

You might also think that it's not a big deal. The new weapons/cards aren't that good or they don't change the battlefield much. Well, what if I had access to some of the new cards and my game got even better? Or the inverse of that is what if some other player got better (killing me and others) because they found a better load out due to DLC? I'll admit that the new weapons/cards that I can't use aren't really slowing me down, but there's still two DLC's to go and anyway, that's not the point.

Long post, short. Indirect pay to win DLC is garbage and needs to stop. Either separate DLC players from non-DLC players (like BC2) or only do DLC that doesn't affect gameplay (skins, maps, emotes, challenges, etc.) At this point, EA/DICE should allow all cards and weapons to be free to everyone (maybe non-DLC players have to earn it) and push emotes, maps, modes, and skins in the new DLC.

You can disagree with me (and I'd like to hear why) but I've been a gamer since Intellivision (google it) and I've seen gamers shoot themselves in the foot over and over again. This is just another example.

0

Replies

Yeah, and i want more guns and dlc bring that, (fam, the season pass has gone on sale for dirt cheap often, especially for what i paid when i got it) i dont want to be stuck with no new guns because someone cries pay to win. And well if a new player cant handle that, then V

Yeah, and i want more guns and dlc bring that, (fam, the season pass has gone on sale for dirt cheap often, especially for what i paid when i got it) i dont want to be stuck with no new guns because someone cries pay to win. And well if a new player cant handle that, then

Never said "no new guns." Just no new guns behind DLC that separates the DLC gamers from the non-DLC gamers. Clear now?

Well, the new guns were behind dlc, which i bought, if a player cant adapt and overcome things like disruption, not my problem, just like dioxis grenade, its area of denial, its not giving dlc purchasers insta kills. Vanilla players are not disadvantaged. The only real thing that gives dlc owners more power is the EE-4 which is a good CQC gun, but the jawa blaster does the same thing just with shorter ranged, vanilla players are not at a disadvantage

Well, the new guns were behind dlc, which i bought, if a player cant adapt and overcome things like disruption, not my problem, just like dioxis grenade, its area of denial, its not giving dlc purchasers insta kills. Vanilla players are not disadvantaged. The only real thing that gives dlc owners more power is the EE-4 which is a good CQC gun, but the jawa blaster does the same thing just with shorter ranged, vanilla players are not at a disadvantage

It doesn't matter if ALL of the DLC weapons/cards are terrible. Point is the online community is divided. Some players have more load out option than others. It's that simple. Also, you keep assuming that I suck or can't overcome the difference. My gameplay K/D and W/L really hasn't changed since the first DLC and that's not the reason for my post. It's a bad trend in gaming (which I already said in my ridiculously long post).

Actually i could care less how good you are, or whether you are garbage, and if they want the new cards/guns buy the dlc. Most people are going to want to play new maps that come from dlc. Like i said if they want the guns/cards/maps buy them. If not deal with it. example, some random dude says "man i sure wish i could be a demon hunter, but i dont wanna buy legion! Blizzard gimmie demon hunter cuz its no fair!"

Actually i could care less how good you are, or whether you are garbage, and if they want the new cards/guns buy the dlc. Most people are going to want to play new maps that come from dlc. Like i said if they want the guns/cards/maps buy them. If not deal with it. example, some random dude says "man i sure wish i could be a demon hunter, but i dont wanna buy legion! Blizzard gimmie demon hunter cuz its no fair!"

Again *sigh* it's not a money issue. I'm make a good living and I've bought a ton of DLC in the past. It's about changing the core gameplay. The multiplayer of ANY game should have THE EXACT SAME GAMEPLAY for everyone. Skins, emotes, maps, don't change gameplay so that's fine. Weapons and cards do. Got it?

Honestly i was going to make a long response but i decided against it, instead im going to enjoy my game with all the delicious dlc equipment i got with it and play vanilla modes so that the tears of non dlc holders can fill my stomach with impish glee. And that glee will increase even more once death star comes out. Not my fault if players dont want to purchase dlc for new gear

I agree with what you're saying, but for this game it's too late, most sp owners just want to give up maps so we kill playlist and all can play, but if we kill maps/weapons. All we got was a couple new modes and heroes for 50$? And that would discourage me from ever buying a season pass. for future games, yes I agree with your post, but for this game, too little too late I'm afraid.

I'm ok with the season pass but I do agree that it is a little unfair to people that don't have it. Honestly the $50 price tag for the season pass was a little bit too much, it should've been about $20 cheaper.

There has to be a reward for paying extra for an expansion and equally a dangling carrot to entice players who are on the fence to hand over their cash.

It's not quite pay to win, EE-4 certainly plays a major factor in my demise these days, but that's most likely because it's flavour of the month. I've been playing a lot of Bespin to work on my contracts and have no problem taking people out with vanilla weapons and I don't class myself as anything other than average. Therefore the EE-4's advantage is only slight.

Disruption is a pain in the neck but the Star Card "ideas pool" appears to be drying up, so expect even more crazy abilities in the coming months. I can well imagine the infamous cloak of invisibility making an appearance at some point.

In any case, with battlefront DLC so far, its been far from pay to win.

When the Relby and the DT-12 were released, they were generally average. DT-12 has slightly improved but I am poor with the relby anyways. The scattergun is decent, but not overpowering.

And with Bespin, the EE-4 is great, but at close range, at a push OK at mid range. Try and shoot long distance with it, you get nowhere. So its good in the situation its meant to be. The X8 is unforgiving if you miss any shots with it and takes a while to get used to, and again is far from pay to win. The disruption star card is annoying but can be countered easily with the scattergun/scout pistol/etc. The shock grenade is OK generally at best.

Out of all of that equipment (I may have forgot something), we have had one/two items at best which are good. Mainly because before everything was released, non pass holders were complaining about OP, pay to win, etc.

EE-4 is very effective at close range, but other blasters will wreck an EE-4 user at any ranges beyond that. I've already gone back to the EE-3 and E-11 because I can't stand to see targets at medium range and tickle them. The EE-4 does have it's disadvantages.

In regard to disruptor, carry the cycler. Roll and pull it out as soon as disruption hits you, and blow the guy back to respawn. You'll feel a lot better!

Have you been killed by the ee-4 or had disruption used on you before creating this topic, by any chance?

Nope. As I said in my post my gameplay result really haven't changed. This is not an "angry" post as the result of some new weapon. In fact, this same trend ***** me off in Super Smash Brothers and Mortal Kombat X as well.

There has to be a reward for paying extra for an expansion and equally a dangling carrot to entice players who are on the fence to hand over their cash.

It's not quite pay to win, EE-4 certainly plays a major factor in my demise these days, but that's most likely because it's flavour of the month. I've been playing a lot of Bespin to work on my contracts and have no problem taking people out with vanilla weapons and I don't class myself as anything other than average. Therefore the EE-4's advantage is only slight.

Disruption is a pain in the neck but the Star Card "ideas pool" appears to be drying up, so expect even more crazy abilities in the coming months. I can well imagine the infamous cloak of invisibility making an appearance at some point.

The rewards is new maps, modes, skins and such. Not weapon and card (advantages. I though that was clear.

This isn't about the weapons/cards being released, it about some players on the battlefield have more OPTIONS than others. Call it indirect pay to win, cal it pay for options, call it pay for variety, call it whatever....point is that the battlefield is no longer full of equal footed players. Some have more options and thus, arguably a slight advantage.

EE-4 is very effective at close range, but other blasters will wreck an EE-4 user at any ranges beyond that. I've already gone back to the EE-3 and E-11 because I can't stand to see targets at medium range and tickle them. The EE-4 does have it's disadvantages.

In regard to disruptor, carry the cycler. Roll and pull it out as soon as disruption hits you, and blow the guy back to respawn. You'll feel a lot better!

I'd second that, but on the close in maps I'd use the Scout Pistol. 6 Second Cool down means more blasting!

This isn't about the weapons/cards being released, it about some players on the battlefield have more OPTIONS than others. Call it indirect pay to win, cal it pay for options, call it pay for variety, call it whatever....point is that the battlefield is no longer full of equal footed players. Some have more options and thus, arguably a slight advantage.

Nope. As I said in my post my gameplay result really haven't changed. This is not an "angry" post as the result of some new weapon. In fact, this same trend **** me off in Super Smash Brothers and Mortal Kombat X as well.

If you want to call it "pay for options" or "pay for variety", then YES! That's what paid-DLC is for! That's very different from any kind of "pay to win" scenario.

Part of me understands the point you're trying to make, which is 'the playing field should be level for all players, regardless of whether or not they paid extra', but I think the additional heroes / weapons / star cards from the DLC have been pretty well balanced and countered by things available to non-DLC owners. The really unbalanced stuff (Bactazerkers + ES) was available to all and has been appropriately nerfed.

I'm ok with the season pass but I do agree that it is a little unfair to people that don't have it. Honestly the $50 price tag for the season pass was a little bit too much, it should've been about $20 cheaper.

It's a good point. If a game sells for $60, it should have all the base content. For a Star Wars game that's content like Chewbacca and the Death Star and all weapons and cards. DLCs should contain things like special maps and modes, extra story elements, and new missions. Things that only affect a single player offering. That's how Skyrim did it. This paying another $60 for a half-good, half-bad lineup of dlc content is laughing in the face of consumerism.

It's not. Good EE-4 is really strong, but I don't care, its users are still dying to my E-11. But you can buy the DLC as well and use the pay to win stuff That's how business works, in every new DLC the weapons and heroes are a little bit stronger until the nerf before the next DLC.

IMO when you get a dlc you are using weapons that are unstable in that there are likely to be future changes made to them if they are too overpowered (like the ee-4 at close range) so it is almost always a safe bet to stick to the original vanilla weapons that they have fully worked out